System and methods for determining the location dynamics of a portable computing device

ABSTRACT

A location system for locating and determining the motion and velocity of a wireless device. The methods include direct inferences about whether a device is in motion versus static based on a statistical analysis of the variation of radio signal strengths over time. The system is trained according to a sparse set of identified locations from which signal strengths are measured. The system uses the signal properties of the identified locations to interpolate for a new location of the wireless device. The system uses a probabilistic graph where the identified locations of the floor plan, expected walking speeds of pedestrians, and independent inference of whether or not the device is in motion are used to determine the new location of the device.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a divisional of U.S. patent application Ser. No.10/610,190, entitled “SYSTEM AND METHODS FOR DETERMINING THE LOCATIONDYNAMICS OF A PORTABLE COMPUTING DEVICE”, filed Jun. 30, 2003, which isrelated to pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/423,093 entitled“CALIBRATION OF A DEVICE LOCATION MEASUREMENT SYSTEM THAT UTILIZESWIRELESS SIGNAL STRENGTHS”, filed Apr. 25, 2003. This application isalso related to co-filed, copending applications MS303523.08/MSFTP456USBand MS303523.09/MSFTP456USC. The entireties of these applications areincorporated herein by reference.

TECHNICAL FIELD

This invention relates to equipment location systems, and morespecifically, to a probabilistic location system that determines devicelocation and motion using wireless signal strengths.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

The increasing ubiquity of wireless network access has motivated thecreation of several methods aimed at identifying the location of awireless client based on radio signal strength measurements. Althoughthese location-based systems continue to improve in terms of accuracyand ease of use, prior efforts have not yet considered the use of theambient wireless infrastructure to identify in a direct manner thedynamics of the client, such as its motion and velocity. The samesignals used for inferring location can be used for inferring dynamics.The information about dynamics, in turn, are useful for helping to inferboth the client location and context, in general. Direct access toknowledge about the motion of a client has implications for the best wayto fuse a series of signals received over time. For instance, knowledgethat a client is motionless would let a location algorithm fuse a set ofestimates for the current location into a single estimate with highercertainty. Knowledge of whether a mobile device (and user associatedwith a mobile client) is in motion may be useful, for example, toprovide a signal about if and how to alert a user with an importantmessage. It may be preferred to withhold messages until a user hasarrived at a location, or only to let the most important messagesthrough when a user is moving. In another example, it may be preferredto compress a message through summarization or truncation when a user ismoving, or raise the volume of an alerting modality, or increase thesize of the text of a display.

Location information may be employed to find people, places, and objectsof interest. Beyond providing access to the current status of people anditems, location information can support presence-forecasting services,which services provide information about a user's future presence oravailability. In other applications, location is also useful foridentifying the best way to relay notifications to a user, given deviceavailabilities and the cost of interruption associated with differentcontexts. Location information may also be harnessed for the task ofmarshalling a set of nearby devices or device components.

Outdoor applications can rely on decoding timing signals from GPS(Global Positioning Service) or GLONASS (Global Navigation SatelliteSystem) satellite navigation systems to obtain high-confidence locationinformation. Unfortunately, no comparably ubiquitous means of measuringlocation is available for indoor applications. Although specializedsystems such as active badges or radio frequency identification (RFID)tags can work well indoors, their installation costs may beprohibitive—and they require users to carry an extra device.

A promising alternative to relying on such specialized location systemsis to infer location by accessing signals generated by an existing IEEE802.11 wireless infrastructure (hereinafter also denoted as “Wi-Fi”) ofthe building. Wi-Fi installations have been diffusing quickly intoprivate and public spaces. In parallel, increasing numbers of mobiledevices equipped with IEEE 802.11 network interface hardware or built-inWi-Fi sensing are becoming available. As the Wi-Fi infrastructurebecomes more ubiquitous, location techniques exploiting the ambientradio signals can grow with it, despite the fact that Wi-Fi was neverintended for inferring location.

Developing methods for accessing device information from an existingIEEE 802.11 Wi-Fi networking infrastructure is attractive as the use ofambient signals and receivers bypasses the need for special broadcastingand sensing hardware. Prior efforts on ascertaining location from IEEE802.11 wireless signals have relied on the construction of detailedmodels of transmission and burdensome calibration efforts, aimed atmapping signals to locations.

The capability to identify the location of wireless clients indoors bymeasuring signal strengths from multiple IEEE 802.11 access points isnot new. Matching signal strength signatures is the same basic techniqueused by all location-from-802.11 techniques, including a first one,called RADAR. Using a manually calibrated table of signal strengths, theRADAR nearest-neighbor algorithm gave a median spatial error ofapproximately 2.94 meters. In follow-on work, this error was reduced toapproximately 2.37 meters using a Viterbi-like algorithm. Furtherresearch also precomputed signal strength signatures using a model ofradio propagation and a floor plan of the building. This reduced thecalibration effort at the expense of increasing their median locationerror to 4.3 meters.

Another conventional system, and perhaps the most accurate IEEE 802.11location system, used Bayesian reasoning and a hidden Markov model(HMM). This system took into account not only signal strengths, but alsothe probability of seeing an access point from a given location. Likeother work, it was based on a manual calibration. The system explicitlymodeled orientation and achieved a median spatial error of about onemeter using calibration samples taken approximately every 1.5 meters(five feet) in hallways. Many additional conventional systems have beenemployed using, for example, signal-to-noise ratios instead of the morecommonly used raw signal strengths, and a formula that was used forapproximating the distance to an access point as a function of signalstrength.

Wi-Fi-centric systems have several attractive features, includingprivacy of location information. All location computations can beperformed on the client device, and the device does not need to revealthe identity of the user or other information to the wireless interfacesto the wired network. The combination of growing ubiquity of Wi-Fiinfrastructure, existing capable client devices, and privacy solutionsmake IEEE 802.11a compelling way to identify location.

However, what is still needed is a Wi-Fi location-based system thatrequires less training time while providing additional informationrelated to location dynamics.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The following presents a simplified summary of the invention in order toprovide a basic understanding of some aspects of the invention. Thissummary is not an extensive overview of the invention. It is notintended to identify key/critical elements of the invention or todelineate the scope of the invention. Its sole purpose is to presentsome concepts of the invention in a simplified form as a prelude to themore detailed description that is presented later.

The present invention disclosed and claimed herein, in one aspectthereof, comprises architecture for determining the state of motion andlocation of a portable computing device by analyzing the strengths ofwireless signals in a wireless network. Having information about movingversus not moving and more accurate location information is useful for avariety of applications, including for systems that make decisions aboutthe best time and device for alerting a user. The invention facilitatestracking of individuals and/or components, as well as providing relevantinformation (e.g., based on state, as well as inferred future state) toa user in a wireless network. The invention also facilitates optimizingcommunications, e.g., maintaining communications and data throughput.

More specifically, the present invention introduces a coherentprobabilistic interpretation of signal strengths and visible accesspoints, and employs an HMM representation. However, the presentinvention is distinct in its use of more sophisticated models thanconventional systems for providing estimates of state transitionprobabilities, which leads to reduced calibration effort. The novelsystem works from a connected graph of discrete (x, y) high-densitylocation nodes on the floor of the building. Upon the receipt of a setof signal strengths, the HMM is used to compute the probability that thedevice is at each of the location nodes. At each point in time, eachpair of location nodes has a transition probability associated therewiththat gives the probability that the device will move from the firstmember of the pair to the second. These transition probabilities are afunction of elapsed time since the last signal strength reading, thedistance between the pair of nodes, and the probability that the deviceis currently in motion. Rather than considering the distance between apair of nodes to be the Euclidian distance, the shortest path distanceis based on a constraint-sensitive path-planning algorithm that takesinto consideration the walls of a building floor plan such that pathscannot pass through walls.

The invention includes probabilistic methods for enhancing robustnessand reducing the training (or calibration) effort associated withlocation services based on ambient IEEE 802.11 infrastructures. Thedisclosed architecture employs a probabilistic graph where locations arenodes and transition probabilities among nodes are derived as a functionof the building (or floor plan) layout, expected walking speeds ofpedestrians, and an independent inference of whether or not a device isin motion. Calibration of signal strengths is relatively easy comparedto other systems of this type. The present invention provides arelatively accurate location sensing system while minimizing calibrationeffort by including interpolation of signal strengths from a sparselysampled set of calibration nodes, exploiting path constraints imposed bythe building's interior structure (e.g., walls and doors), integratingthe consideration of human pedestrian speeds, making independentinferences about whether or not a client device is in motion, andfolding in these inferences into the location analysis. Thus the mobileclient is as smart as possible in order to maintain accuracy in spite ofsparse calibration data, which can be tedious to obtain. Overall, thepresent invention provides a principled framework representing asuperior tradeoff between accuracy and calibration effort by includingpath, time, and rate constraints that are important for extractingvaluable data out of the typically noisy raw signal data.

The disclosed system facilitates visiting a much sparser set of locationnodes for calibration then conventional systems. Interpolation isemployed to estimate observation probabilities at the high-densitylocation nodes from the lower density calibration nodes. Thissignificantly reduces the necessary calibration effort. The graph oflocation nodes, transition probabilities, and observation probabilitiesare combined with a Viterbi algorithm to compute a probabilitydistribution over the high-density nodes from every set of observedsignal strengths obtained during live operation of the system. Theexpected value of device location is reported as an ultimate result,showing that the median error is approximately 1.53 meters.

To the accomplishment of the foregoing and related ends, certainillustrative aspects of the invention are described herein in connectionwith the following description and the annexed drawings. These aspectsare indicative, however, of but a few of the various ways in which theprinciples of the invention may be employed and the present invention isintended to include all such aspects and their equivalents. Otheradvantages and novel features of the invention may become apparent fromthe following detailed description of the invention when considered inconjunction with the drawings.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 illustrates a block diagram of a system for facilitatingdetermination of location dynamics of the present invention.

FIG. 2 illustrates a flow chart of processes of the probabilitycomponent of the present invention.

FIG. 3A illustrates a graphical representation of the low-density nodeson the floor plan, as drawn by someone setting up the system.

FIG. 3B illustrates a graphical representation of the high-density nodesautomatically added to the low-density nodes on the floor plan.

FIG. 3C illustrates a graphical representation of the calibration nodesof the floor plan used to obtain signal strength readings, as providedby the data collection system of the present invention.

FIG. 4 illustrates a flow chart of the process for establishinglow-density and high-density nodes for use by computer drawing ormapping program of the disclosed architecture.

FIG. 5A illustrates a plot of the raw unsmoothed a posterioriprobabilities of whether or not a device is moving over time.

FIG. 5B illustrates a plot of the smoothed a posteriori probabilities ofwhether or not a device is moving over time.

FIG. 5C illustrates a plot of the actual state of motion of the deviceassociated with FIGS. 5A and 5B.

FIG. 6 illustrates a state diagram of a 2-state Markov model used fordetermining the dynamic state of a device.

FIG. 7 illustrates a plot of histograms of the variances for the stilland moving cases.

FIG. 8 illustrates a plot of a conventional distribution of humanwalking speeds used in accordance with the present invention.

FIG. 9 illustrates a screenshot of a graphical user interface of thedata collection program for facilitating signal strength logging of thecalibration data.

FIG. 10 illustrates a block diagram of a computer operable to executethe disclosed architecture.

FIG. 11 illustrates a schematic block diagram of an exemplary computingenvironment in accordance with the present invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

The present invention is now described with reference to the drawings,wherein like reference numerals are used to refer to like elementsthroughout. In the following description, for purposes of explanation,numerous specific details are set forth in order to provide a thoroughunderstanding of the present invention. It may be evident, however, thatthe present invention may be practiced without these specific details.In other instances, well-known structures and devices are shown in blockdiagram form in order to facilitate describing the present invention.

As used in this application, the terms “component” and “system” areintended to refer to a computer-related entity, either hardware, acombination of hardware and software, software, or software inexecution. For example, a component may be, but is not limited to being,a process running on a processor, a processor, an object, an executable,a thread of execution, a program, and/or a computer. By way ofillustration, both an application running on a server and the server canbe a component. One or more components may reside within a processand/or thread of execution and a component may be localized on onecomputer and/or distributed between two or more computers.

As used herein, the term “inference” refers generally to the process ofreasoning about or inferring states of the system, environment, and/oruser from a set of observations as captured via events and/or data.Inference can be employed to identify a specific context or action, orcan generate a probability distribution over states, for example. Theinference can be probabilistic—that is, the computation of a probabilitydistribution over states of interest based on a consideration of dataand events. Inference can also refer to techniques employed forcomposing higher-level events from a set of events and/or data. Suchinference results in the construction of new events or actions from aset of observed events and/or stored event data, whether or not theevents are correlated in close temporal proximity, and whether theevents and data come from one or several event and data sources.

Referring now to FIG. 1, there is illustrated a block diagram of asystem 100 for facilitating determination of the location andinstantaneous dynamics of the present invention. A measurement component102 receives as one input signal strengths 104 derived from wirelesssignals associated with multiple wireless network interfaces, alsocalled access points (APs). Note that the measurement component 102 mayalso be configured to receive the raw signals, and then process theseraw signals to obtain the signal strength data thereof. In any case, thesignal strength data 104 is processed and utilized by a probabilisticprocessing component 106 to ultimately report as an output an expectedvalue 108 that a portable device is at a location as well as aprobability that it is currently in motion.

As is described in greater detail hereinbelow, the probabilisticprocessing component 106 employs a probabilistic graph where locationsare represented as location nodes, and transition probabilities amongthe location nodes are derived as a function of the building (or floorplan) layout, expected walking speeds of pedestrians, and an independentinference of whether or not a device is in motion.

The probabilistic component 106 uses more sophisticated models thanconventional systems for providing estimates of state transitionprobabilities, which leads to a reduction in calibration effort. Morespecifically, the system 100 provides a probabilistic interpretation ofsignal strengths and visible access points, and employs a hidden Markovmodel (HMM) representation. Upon the receipt of a set of the signalstrengths 104, the HMM is used to compute the probability that theportable device is at each of the location nodes. At each point in time,each pair of nodes has a transition probability associated therewiththat gives the probability that the device will move from the firstmember of the pair to the second. These transition probabilities are afunction of elapsed time since the last signal strength reading, thedistance between the pair of nodes, and the probability that the deviceis currently in motion. Rather than considering the distance between apair of nodes to be the Euclidian distance, the shortest path distanceis based on a constraint-sensitive path-planning algorithm that takesinto consideration the walls of a building floor plan such that pathscannot pass through walls.

The system 100 provides a relatively accurate location sensing systemwhile minimizing calibration effort by including interpolation of signalstrengths from a sparsely sampled set, exploiting path constraintsimposed by a building's interior structure (e.g., walls and doors),integrating a consideration of human pedestrian speeds, makingindependent inferences about whether or not a client device is inmotion, and folding in these inferences into the location analysis. Thusthe mobile client is as smart as possible in order to maintain accuracyin spite of sparse calibration data, which can be tedious to obtain.Overall, the present invention provides a principled frameworkrepresenting a superior tradeoff between accuracy and calibration effortby including path, time, and rate constraints that are important forextracting valuable data out of the typically noisy raw signal data.

The probability component 106 significantly reduces calibration effortby employing regression by interpolating to estimate observationprobabilities at the high-density location nodes from the lower densitycalibration nodes. The graph of location nodes, transitionprobabilities, and observation probabilities are combined with theViterbi algorithm to compute a probability distribution over thelocation nodes from every set of observed signal strengths. The expectedvalue of location is reported as an ultimate result, showing that themedian error is approximately 1.53 meters.

The likely speed of the portable device is considered explicitly, byinferring the likelihood that a device is moving. A model for inferringmotion in described in greater detail hereinbelow. The speed of theportable device is computed as the expected velocity, based on aconsideration of the probability distribution of human pedestrian speedsand on an inference of whether or not the device is moving.

The graph of location nodes, transition probabilities, and observationprobabilities are combined with the Viterbi algorithm to compute aprobability distribution over the location nodes from every set ofobserved signal strengths. The present invention reports the expectedvalue of location as its ultimate result.

Referring now to FIG. 2, there is illustrated a flow chart of processesof the probability component of the present invention. While, forpurposes of simplicity of explanation, the one or more methodologiesshown herein, e.g., in the form of a flow chart, are shown and describedas a series of acts, it is to be understood and appreciated that thepresent invention is not limited by the order of acts, as some acts may,in accordance with the present invention, occur in different ordersand/or concurrently with other acts from that shown and describedherein. For example, those skilled in the art will understand andappreciate that a methodology could alternatively be represented as aseries of interrelated states or events, such as in a state diagram.Moreover, not all illustrated acts may be required to implement amethodology in accordance with the present invention.

The disclosed architecture uses IEEE 802.11 signal strengths to estimatethe location and infer motion of a portable device. The signals comefrom statically placed IEEE 802.11 access points that provide a wirelesslink between mobile devices and a wired network.

Note that the novel architecture is not restricted to using accesspoints, since other types of wireless RF transmitters may be employed inlieu of or in combination with the access points. For example, in anasset management location system, a Real Time Locating System (RTLS) mayutilize the benefits of the disclosed invention. A RTLS is fullyautomated system that continually monitors the location of assets and/orpersonnel, and typically utilizes battery-operated radio tags and acellular locating system to detect the presence and location of thetags. The locating system is usually deployed as a matrix of locatingdevices that are installed at a spacing of anywhere from fifty to onethousand feet. These locating devices determine the locations of theradio tags, which tags may be placed on any item or person. Thus thesignal strengths are received from RF transmitters that activate thetransponder tags to determine where the item is located, or the locationand/or movement of the person. In this respect, the RTLS system may becalibrated and analyzed in the same way.

Initially, a floor plan of the area to be calibrated is used to developlow-density nodes, which are a set of nodes that define a sparse networkof locations in the floor plan that approximate walking paths typicallyused by the user of a portable device. Utilizing the floor planfacilitates selecting the nodes used in interpolation process. Thelow-density nodes are the endpoints of straight-line segments of thenetwork, and are a subset of the total number of nodes that willeventually be used to infer the device motion and location. Once thelow-density nodes are developed, high-density nodes are interspersedautomatically by the computer in the floor plan of low-density nodesaccording to user-defined spatial criteria.

Measuring the signal strengths at various locations of the floor plan isthe calibration process that yields a number of probability distributionfunctions at every high-density node, where each probabilitydistribution function gives the probability of “seeing” a given signalstrength from a given access point, at that high-density node. Theprobability distributions of a given high-density node are called theobservation probabilities for that node. Since it would be impracticalto visit each location of the floor plan and record signal strengths, amuch sparser set of location nodes is visited for calibration.Interpolation is then employed to estimate observation probabilities atthe high-density nodes from the calibration nodes. This significantlyreduces the necessary calibration effort.

Thus, at 200, a computer generated and processable map of the floor planis developed for establishing thereon both the low and high-densitylocation nodes. Although combined at 200, the low-density nodes aredeveloped first by manual entry, followed by automatic population of thefloor plan with the high-density nodes interspersed among thelow-density nodes. At 202, the system is then trained by a calibrationprocess that measures and records signal strengths at each of a set ofcalibration nodes. The location of the calibration nodes is notnecessarily chosen to be the same as that of the low-density and/orhigh-density node locations, although this may occur incidentally. Thecalibration process facilitates the derivation of signal strengthdistributions for each calibration node. At 204, observationprobabilities are generated and assigned to each high-density node basedon the observed signal strengths at a calibration node.

At 206, transition probabilities are generated and assigned for eachpair of high-density nodes using path constraint information,moving/still probabilities information, and speed distribution databetween each pair of high-density nodes. At 208, a Viterbi algorithm isused to combine elements of the HMM to produce a set of probabilitiesfor all high-density nodes for all observed signal strengths. Otheralgorithms may also be used. Each high-density node is then assigned alocation probability value that the portable device is at that node, asindicated at 210. Interpolation is used based upon the high-density datato determine the likelihood that the device is at or near a high-densitynode, as indicated at 212. The process then reaches a Stop block.

Referring now to FIG. 3A, there is illustrated a graphicalrepresentation of the low-density location nodes on a floor plan 300, asdrawn by someone setting up the system. In order to facilitate pathconstraints imposed by the floor plan structure 300 (e.g., walls anddoors), the disclosed location system provides a graphicalrepresentation of discrete location nodes. Initially, as shown in FIG.3A, the user utilizes the floor plan 300 of the area that will becalibrated to manually draw lines that represent the likely walkingpaths 302 between all locations of the area to be calibrated. Thisintroduces a network of low-density nodes 304 (that includes endpointnodes and intermediate straight-line segments endpoints nodes) into thefloor plan 300.

FIG. 3B illustrates a graphical representation of the floor plan thatincludes the high-density nodes automatically interspersed among thelow-density nodes. A data collection algorithm automatically calculatesand distributes the set of high-density nodes among the set oflow-density location nodes according to spatial criteria input by theuser. Thus FIG. 3B shows the total set of discrete nodes mapped onto thefloor plan 300, which includes all of the low-density location nodesused for inferring device location at the high-density nodes. A heavyline 308 shows the shortest path between two location nodes (310 and312). Edge weights (i.e., the connections between the nodes) are definedas the distances between any two adjacent nodes. FIG. 3C illustrates agraphical representation of the floor plan calibration node locations314 for measuring signal strength readings.

Once all data is processed through a Viterbi algorithm, the result is anumber attached to each location node (304 and 306) giving theprobability that the device is at or near that location.

Referring now to FIG. 4, there is illustrated a flow chart of theprocess for establishing low-density and high-density nodes for use bycomputer drawing or mapping program of the disclosed architecture. At400, a computer-based graphical bitmap representation is generated ofthe floor plan to be calibrated. A drawing program is provided thatdisplays as the background a bitmap of a building floor plan. The bitmapfor the floor plan may be obtained from an electronic database of floorplans or from a scanned blueprint. The transformation between pixels andfloor coordinates is computed with a simple least squares fit solutionfor the transformation matrix based on corresponding points in thebitmap and on the actual floor plan.

At 402, to place the low-density nodes, a set of human path lines ortracks that approximate walkways that might be taken is manually drawnvia the mapping program interface throughout the floor plan, as shownpreviously in FIG. 3A. These tracks represent the feasible walking pathsof a user and a portable device that may be followed as the user movesthroughout the floor plan area. The drawing program allows a user todraw straight lines on the floor plan whose end points can be anchoredto a certain location or hinged anywhere on a previously drawn line. Theprogram also provides simple editing controls for moving lines and endpoints. Once all the path lines have been drawn, the program convertsthe lines to the low-density nodes by processing each path straight-lineendpoint as a location node, as indicated at 404.

At 406, the mapping program automatically distributes high-density nodesamong the low-density nodes throughout the floor plan bitmap, accordingto spatial criteria provided by the user. For example, where the spacingis one meter, a total of 317 low-density and high-density nodes aregenerated for this floor plan, as illustrated in FIG. 3B.

The high-density nodes represent a graph that is a fully connected,bi-directional graph so that every node connects to every other node. At408, the shortest paths to adjacent high-density nodes are computed asthe Euclidean distance and stored. The edges shown in FIG. 3B are onlythe edges between adjacent nodes, and the edge weights are the Euclidiandistance between the nodes. At 410, the shortest path throughnon-adjacent high-density nodes is computed according to a shortest-pathalgorithm and stored. The shortest paths are computed using a shortestpath algorithm by noted scientist Edsger W. Dijkstra. For non-adjacentnodes, the edge weight is the shortest path distance through a sequenceof adjacent nodes. All the distances are stored for later use by theHMM.

The shortest path distances embody the path constraints imposed by thefloor plan structure. For instance, FIG. 3B illustrates with the thickline 312 the shortest path connecting the approximate centers of twooffices. This is the shortest path between the two endpoints (310 and312), and it encapsulates the fact that to get between these two points,a device would have to travel at least as long as the shortest path, asopposed to the direct Euclidian distance, which is much shorter.Formally, the distance between nodes i and j is called d_(ij). Thesedistances are used later to compute realistic transition probabilitiesbetween all nodes in the graph. The transition probabilities aredescribed in greater detail hereinbelow.

The discrete nature of the nodes causes a slight problem in that thedevice to be located is likely not precisely at any of the predefinedlow-density or high-density nodes. This challenge is mitigated by thefact that the nodes are fairly close together (no more than one meterseparates adjacent nodes), and that in the end a continuous positionestimate is computed based on the expected value of the discreteprobability distribution over all the node coordinates. However, for avariety of potential location-specific applications, this resolution isusually enough.

In computing the location probabilities, the Viterbi algorithm used forthe HMM seeks the best position by optimizing over all possible pathsthrough the nodes with respect to the history of measured signalstrengths. Another way to achieve this respect for past measurements isvia the use of a Kalman filter, which has the advantage of beingcontinuous. However, the Kalman filter neither allows the sort of pathconstraints imposed herein nor the capability of representing multimodalprobability distributions over location, as the more general HMMformulation does. Another alternative to the HMM formulation is aparticle filter, which has been used for robot localization. A particlefilter could embody the same sort of path constraints, but carries therisk of being more expensive to compute.

Determining Motion of the Portable Device

As indicated previously, location inferences consider inferences aboutthe state of motion of a device. That is, in order to utilize transitionprobabilities between pairs of high-density nodes, movement or lackthereof by the portable device must be considered. Thus the likelihoodthat a device is moving or at rest needs to be determined. Thediscrimination of a device in motion versus at rest is challenging apriori as IEEE 802.11 signals from multiple APs change in strengthchaotically, even when a system is at rest due to multiple factors,including people walking in regions between multiple APs and devices.Even in light of such “twinkling” of the signal from different APs atrest, the methods described herein provide valuable inferences aboutwhether a device is moving versus still by examining the nature anddegree of the flickering of signals from different APs over a short timewindow. The core notion behind the method is that a statistical analysiscan exploit the greater variation of signal strengths from APs when adevice is in motion than when it is still; signal strengths typicallyappear to vary differently when the device is in motion than when it isstill.

Referring now to FIG. 6, there is illustrated a state diagram of a2-state Markov model 600 used for determining the dynamic state of adevice. As shown, the model 600 includes the moving state 602 and stillstate 604. A transition 606 from moving to still is defined by a_(MS),and the transition 608 from still to moving is defined by a_(SM). Whenthe device remains in a moving state, this is represented by theloopback path 610, defined as a_(MM). Similarly, when the device remainsmotionless, this is represented by the loopback path 612, defined asa_(SS). Note that the HMM for the dynamic state of the device (movingvs. still) is different from the HMM for the location of the device.

Unsmoothed State Probabilities

Referring now to FIG. 5A, there is illustrated a plot of the unsmootheda posteriori probability of a device moving over time. Theseprobabilities are computed based on a feature that captures thevariation of the signal strength over time. That is, at any given time,the access point with the strongest signal is sensed, and then thevariance of that access point's signal over a short interval ending atthe given time is computed. The portable computer measuring systemutilizes a data collection program that is trained by collecting a setof labeled signal strengths by alternately walking around measuringsignal strengths, and then stopping within an office. This process isperformed over a thirty-minute period while recording the signalstrengths. The data collection program also records whether or not thewirelessly connected laptop was moving. The variances are computed witha 20-sample window, which translates to approximately sixty-threereadings per access point at a sampling rate of 3.16 Hz.

Referring now to FIG. 7, there is illustrated a plot 700 of histogramsof the variances for the still and moving cases, as describedhereinabove. Using σ_(max) ² to represent the windowed variance of thecurrent maximum signal strength, the histograms are used to representthe conditional probability distributions p(σ_(max) ²|still) andp(σ_(max) ²|moving). Given a value of σ_(max) ², estimations are madefor the probability of moving, p(moving|σ_(max) ²), and the probabilityof being still, p(still|σ_(max) ²)=1−p(moving|σ_(max) ²). Using a Bayesrule classifier, it can be said that the posterior probability of theclient moving is, $\begin{matrix}{{p\left( {{moving}❘\sigma_{\max}^{2}} \right)} = \frac{{p\left( {\sigma_{\max}^{2}❘{moving}} \right)}{p({moving})}}{{{p\left( {\sigma_{\max}^{2}❘{moving}} \right)}{p({moving})}} + {{p\left( {\sigma_{\max}^{2}❘{still}} \right)}{p({still})}}}} & (1)\end{matrix}$

Here, p(still) and p(moving) are the a priori probabilities of thedynamic state of the device. In lieu of any other information about thepriors, both are set to 0.5.

Using the histograms on the set of 3200 test readings taken several daysafter the training data, classification into categories as to whetherthe device was “still” or “moving” was made correctly in approximately85% of the data. The posterior probabilities over time computed this wayare illustrated in FIG. 5A.

Note that instead of using the Bayes rule classifier, the subjectinvention can employ various statistical analyses for carrying outvarious aspects of the subject invention. For example, a process fordetermining which destination is to be selected for the synchronizationprocess can be facilitated via an automatic classification system andprocess. Such classification can employ a probabilistic and/orstatistical-based analysis (e.g., factoring into the analysis utilitiesand costs) to prognose or infer an action that a user desires to beautomatically performed. For example, a Bayesian network model orsupport vector machine (SVM) classifier can be employed. Anotherclassification approach includes decision trees. Classification as usedherein also is inclusive of statistical regression that is utilized todevelop models of priority. Such models can consider multipleobservations beyond overall variance, including details of the structureof the distribution over signals from multiple APs, such asconsiderations of the relationship between the largest signal andothers, different modes of distributions over signals over time, andnotions of relative strengths.

Smoothed State Probabilities

Referring now to FIG. 5B, there is illustrated a plot of the smoothed aposteriori probabilities of a device the moving over time. A plot of theunsmoothed probability of moving, p(moving|σ_(max) ²) as a function oftime for the 3200 test points is shown in FIG. 5A. It is clear that theunsmoothed a posteriori probability jumps from high to low too oftengiven the process that is being modeled. It is known that people andtheir devices do not transition from still to moving this often, so itis desirable to smooth the a posteriori probabilities by imposingexplicit transition probabilities governing the still and moving states.FIG. 5C illustrates the actual data for the smoothed and unsmoothedprobability plots of FIGS. 5A and 5B.

Instead of simply trying to estimate the probability of a state q_(T) attime T from a single feature σ_(max,T) ² at that time, the most likelysequence of states Q=q₁, q₂, . . . , q_(T) is found from a sequence ofobservations O=σ_(max,1) ², σ_(max,2) ², . . . , σ_(max,T) ². In thiscase, there are only two possible states, i.e., still and moving, thusq₁ε{S, M}. For simplicity, a first order Markov assumption is used togovern the transition between states, which means that the probabilityof the current state is independent of all but the most recent state, sothat P(q_(t+1)=j|q_(t)=i)=a_(ij), where a_(ij) is a transitionprobability and i, jε{S, M}.

The transition probabilities can be estimated from the assumptions abouthuman behavior. It is proposed that a person will make m moves over aperiod of s seconds. If the signal strength sampling rate is r, therewill be s/r total samples in the time period. The probability of a moveoccurring on one of these samples is then mr/s. If each still-to-movetransition (SM) is assumed to eventually be accompanied by amove-to-still (MS) transition then,a _(SM) =a _(MS)=min(mr/s,1)a _(SS)=1−a _(SM)a _(MM)=1−a _(MS)  (2)

The min( ) function keeps the transition probability within range. Theequations for a_(SS) and a_(MM) come from the constraint thata_(SS)+a_(SM)=a_(MM)+a_(MS)=1.

For a typical office worker, it is estimated that ten moves (i.e., m=10)occur in one eight-hour day, giving s=28,800 seconds. At the radiosignal strength indicator (RSSI) sampling rate of 3.16 Hz, the values ofa_(SM) and a_(MS) are calculated to be the following:a_(SM)=a_(MS)=0.0011a_(SS)=a_(MM)=0.9989  (3)

Another element of the Markov model is the initial probabilities ofbeing in the still or moving states, π_(S) and π_(M), respectively. Forlack of any other information, both are set to 0.5.

Because the states cannot be directly observed, the Markov model isactually “hidden”. What is observed at each sample time t is σ_(max,t) ²which is probabilistically connected to the actual state throughp(σ_(max,t) ²|q_(t)=still) and p(σ_(max,t) ²|q_(t)=move).

All the elements necessary for an HMM have now been determined, i.e.,states, transition probabilities, initial state probabilities, andobservation probabilities. The Viterbi algorithm is used to compute thea posteriori state probabilities P(q_(T)=still|O) and P(q_(T)=moving|O)at the current time T. The Viterbi algorithm gives an efficient methodof computing the state probabilities based on all the past observationsO=σ_(max,1) ², σ_(max,2) ², . . . , σ_(max,T) ². The algorithm isrecursive and so does not require the storage of previous observations.Thus, by running it on the observation at T, all the previousobservations are implicitly being taken into account. Because of thisefficiency, the Viterbi algorithm is re-run on every new observation.

The overall effect of using the HMM is that the transition probabilitiestend to make the system more reluctant to change states due to slight orbrief changes in the state-conditional probability densities p(σ_(max,t)²|q_(t)=still) and p(σ_(max,t) ²|q_(t)=moving). However, for some valuesof σ_(max) ², one or both of these densities drop to zero because thehistogram bin for that σ_(max) ² was never filled during training. Ifjust one of the densities is zero, then the probability of being in thatstate also drops to zero, even if evidence for the opposite state isweak and even if the probability of transitioning to the opposite stateis very low. To help smooth over these occasional state blips due toless-than-complete training data, a standard mathematical hack of addinga slight offset to the state-conditional probabilities is used. Inparticular,p′(σ_(max,t) ² |q _(t)=still)=p(σ_(max,t) ² |q _(t)=still)+αp′(σ_(max,t) ² |q _(t)=moving)=p(σ_(max,t) ² |q _(t)=moving)+α  (4)

Where is alpha is chosen to be α=0.01, and p′(.) is used instead of p(.)for the HMM. While this offset violates one of the most fundamentalcharacteristics of probability densities (that they integrate to one),it does make the smoothing work much better.

Using the transition probabilities computed above and the α-offset, astate-conditional density P(q_(T)=moving|O) is computed for each samplein the 3200-point test data set. FIG. 5B illustrates the resulting plot.This shows how using transition probabilities and a sense of past statemake the state probabilities much less jumpy. The classification errorrate drops from approximately 15.5% to 12.6% by using the HMM smoothing.While the gain in classification accuracy is small, the real gain comesin the reduction of falsely reported state transitions. There werefourteen actual transitions in the test set. Unsmoothed classificationreports 172 transitions (158 too many), and smoothed classificationreports twenty-four transitions (only ten too many). Reducing falsetransitions is important for both helping to localize a wireless device(an important aspect of the disclosed architecture) and for inferringthe context of a user. In terms of context, if the device were judged tobe moving, this would likely mean that the person carrying the device ismoving between locations and is neither in a meeting nor in an office.

Transition Probabilities for Location

The previous section showed how to calculate the probability that aWi-Fi device is in motion. This is one of the ingredients in computingthe transition probabilities between location nodes, which areultimately used in an HMM for computing location. Qualitatively, thetransition probabilities to nearby nodes are desired to be larger thanthat to far away nodes. To quantify motion, the shortest path distancesdescribed hereinabove are used along with a probability distribution ofhuman pedestrian speeds. For a more accurate speed distribution, theHMM-smoothed estimate of p(moving|σ_(max) ²) is used from the previousdescription.

Speed Between Nodes

A probability distribution of human pedestrian speeds will now bederived. In an office building, people mostly walk to get from place toplace. The distribution of walking speeds can be approximated using aplot of FIG. 8 of the distribution of human walking speeds, which may beobtained from conventional studies. This distribution of walking speedsis denoted mathematically herein as P(walking speed|moving). Further,people sometimes shuffle slowly from place to place, and they sometimessprint. This behavior is modeled with a uniform distribution of speedsranging from zero to a maximum of approximately 10.22 meters/second (anestimate of the maximum human running speed), and denoted mathematicallyas P(other speed|moving). It is assumed that when a person is moving,he/she spends a fraction ω walking and the rest of the time at someother speed. Given a person is moving, his/her speed distribution isthen,P(s|moving)=ωP(walking speed|moving)+(1−ω)P(other speed|moving)  (5)

Here s represents speed in meters/second, and assume that ω is 0.9. Theunconditional P(s) takes into account the probability that the person iseither moving or still, which comes from the dynamic inference from theprevious section. Abbreviating these as P(moving) and P(still), P(s) isdefined as,P(s)=P(s|moving)P(moving)+P(s|still)P(still),  (6)

-   -   where P(s|still)=δ(0), because a person's walking speed is zero        when still. Here δ(x) is the Dirac delta function. This gives a        probability distribution of human pedestrian speeds based on        whether or not it is thought that the person is moving, and if        so, the distribution of walking speeds and maximum possible        running speed.

Transition Probabilities

The transition probability between two location nodes is proportional tothe probability of a human traveling at a speed necessary to traversethe distance between the nodes. If a device has moved from node i tonode j, its speed had to be rd_(ij), where r is the RSSI sampling rate(e.g., 3.16 Hz in the disclosed example) and d_(ij) is the shortest pathdistance between the two nodes, as explained above. The probability ofobserving this speed is p_(ij)=P(s=rd_(ij)). These probabilities must benormalized so that all transition probabilities emanating from a nodesum to one. Thus the transition probability is, $\begin{matrix}{{a_{ij} = {p_{ij}/{\sum\limits_{j = 1}^{N}\quad p_{ij}}}},} & (7)\end{matrix}$

-   -   where N=317 is the number of location nodes. These are the        transition probabilities used to calculate the most likely path        through the nodes. These probabilities encapsulate what is known        about the floor plan layout and the speed of the device. Since        the a_(ij) are a function of P(moving), which changes over time,        the a_(ij) must be recomputed at every time step. The Viterbi        algorithm used to calculate the most likely path does not need        to store past transition probabilities, so the necessary updates        do not translate into increased memory requirements.

Signal Strength Observation Likelihoods

When inferring a location, the device's signal strengths are comparedagainst signal strength probability distributions determined previouslyduring calibration at different location nodes in the building. Thesepreviously seen signal strength distributions are estimated based ondata from physically carrying the device to a set of known calibrationnodes. A straightforward implantation would require visiting all N=317high-density location nodes for calibration. Since approximately sixtyseconds is spent at each calibration point, calibrating at each locationnode would be prohibitive. Instead, the calibration readings are takenat a much smaller number of locations (sixty-three in this example), andused to interpolate at the high-density location nodes. This meanscalibration occurred at about 20% of the number of points used in thegraph of high-density location nodes.

Gathering Signal Strength Distributions

Following is a description of how signal strengths are gatheredaccording to the floor plan and how the signal strength probabilitydistributions are interpolated to all high-density location nodes.

Referring now to FIG. 9, there is illustrated a screenshot of agraphical user interface (GUI) 900 of the data collection program forfacilitating signal strength logging of the calibration data. The GUI900 facilitates the display of a graphical representation 902 of thefloor plan of FIG. 3A, and rooms thereof. The user indicates thelocation of the portable receiving device by selecting an (x,y) locationfrom the floor representation 902 via a mouse, keyboard, or otherconventional input device. Additionally, there is presented a signalstrength subwindow 904 for presenting a signal strength indicator plot905 that displays a representation of the measured signal strengths fromnearby transmitters. For example, a first bar 906 includes a first coloror fill pattern that indicates the signal was received from atransmitter on the current floor being calibrated. Associated with thebar 906 is data 908 that indicates the signal strength data, the flooron which the room is located, and the room number of the transmitter(i.e., 113/3/3327). In this particular example, the transmitter was inbuilding number (113), room number 3327 (also denoted graphically at910) of the third floor (3).

A second bar identification 912 may be used to indicate measurementsreceived from transmitters on floors other than the current floor beingcalibrated. The bar 912 is associated with room 113/4/4327, which is aroom 4327 on the fourth floor of building 113. It is to be appreciatedthat the GUI can be programmed to provide a wide variety of graphicalresponses to measure signals, including flashing bars, and text, audiooutput signals, etc., commonly available for providing such interfacefeatures.

The interface 900 also includes a Location Input subwindow 914 thatallows the user to zoom in on a floor map via a Map Zoom subwindow, andchoose a floor for calibration via a Floor Chooser subwindow.

The interface 900 further includes a Scan Control subwindow 916 forselecting the scan rate (in Hertz) for signal detection. The user canalso direct logging of the data to a location on the receiving devicevia a Logging path field 918. The user may also select a remote networkstorage location by entering the corresponding network path in the pathfield 918. Once entered, all data is automatically stored in thedesignated file location.

The IEEE 802.11 signal strength distributions were gathered by carryingthe wirelessly connected laptop computer to different low-densitycalibration nodes in the building while making measurements of thesignal strengths at those locations. These sixty-three low-density nodelocations are shown in FIG. 3A. The portable computer executed the datacollection program for recording both locations and signal strengths.The program, one interface window of which is shown above in FIG. 9,allows the user to indicate his or her location by clicking on the floorplan map while simultaneously recording signal strengths from all“visible” IEEE 802.11 access points. The map makes it easy to indicatethe device's approximate location for calibration. An alternative tousing a map like this would be to measure points on the floor. However,this would be prohibitively time-consuming for calibrating a largebuilding. Therefore, the positions on the map were approximated bystanding in locations that were easy to identify on the map, like thecenters of offices and intersections of hallways. The calibrationlocations were only as accurate as could be determined by selecting thepositions on the map. However, this is a necessary compromise to reducethe calibration effort to a realistic level for larger deployments.

At each calibration location node, as illustrated in FIG. 3C, signalstrength readings were taken for sixty seconds while slowly rotating thedevice in place. The rotational aspect was to factor out the effects oforientation. This is in contrast to a conventional system that modeledand recorded orientation explicitly. With this data, discreteprobability distributions were constructed describing for eachcalibration point, the probability of seeing a given access point andthe probability distribution of signal strengths from that access point.In mathematical terms, the calibration points are x_(i) ^((c)), i=1 . .. N_(c), and the building's access points are designated AP_(i), i=1 . .. N_(AP). The probability of detecting access point AP_(i) fromcalibration location x_(j) ^((c)) is p(AP_(i)|x_(j) ^((c))). Thisprobability was estimated simply by the ratio of the number of times theaccess point was detected to the number of times all access points werescanned during calibration at the given calibration node. (Note thatsixty seconds of scanning at a scan rate of 3.16 Hz translates toquerying all access points approximately 190 times from every location.)This probability might be expected to be either zero or one,corresponding to being out of range or in range of an access point. Thedisclosed experiment shows that the probability takes on values betweenzero and one, as well, as shown in FIG. 7, which shows the histogram ofthe observed values of p(AP_(i)|x_(j) ^((c))) for all access points andall calibration node locations. Given this variation, it is important tomodel this effect.

If signals from an access point were measurable from a given location,then a normalized histogram of signal strengths was also constructed torepresent p(s_(k)≦s<s_(k+1)|AP_(i),x_(j) ^((c))). Here s is the signalstrength and the s_(k) are the edges of the histogram bins. For thisimplementation, s_(k) ranges from −120 dBm to 0 dBm in thirty steps.(Note that dBm denotes decibel milliwatts, and is the usual unit forIEEE 802.11 signal strength.) The overall result of the calibrationcaptured both how often a given access point could be seen from a givenlocation, and if it could be seen, the distribution of signal strengths.These probabilities embody the signal strength signatures that are usedto infer a device's location from the signal strengths it observes.

Interpolating Signal Strength Distributions

The sixty-three calibration points were relatively widely spaced, withan average of approximately 2.64 meters to each point's nearestneighbor. It is desirable to achieve higher spatial resolution with aset of location nodes spaced more densely than the calibration nodes. Asshown in FIG. 3A, the high-density location nodes are much more densethan the calibration nodes. In order to infer location over the denseset of location nodes, signal strength signatures need to be computed ateach of the high-density location nodes. This means the probabilitydistributions at the sparse set of calibration nodes needs to beextended into the denser set of high-density nodes. This is accomplishedby interpolation, using radial basis functions.

From calibration measurements taken at the calibration nodes, theprobabilities at the calibration points are known: p(AP_(i)|x_(j)^((c))) describes the probability of seeing a given access point from acalibration point x_(j) ^((c)), and p(s_(k)≦s<s_(k+1)|AP_(i),x_(j)^((c))) describes the distribution of signal strengths seen from anaccess point AP_(i) at calibration point x_(j) ^((c)). What are wantedare the probabilities at the high-density location nodes, x_(j) ^((i)).The access point probabilities may be considered as a continuousfunction that was sampled at the calibration points. Likewise, thediscrete probabilities of the signal strength distribution may beconsidered as a continuous function over 2-D space. To facilitateinterpolation, the signal strength characteristics of each calibrationpoint are represented by a vector d_(j) ^((c)) consisting of the accesspoint probabilities and the discrete probabilities of the signalstrength distribution from calibration point x_(j) ^((c)). Moreprecisely, if there are N_(AP) access points, and if signal strengthsare discretized into K bins (i.e. s_(k), k=1 . . . K), then the vectord_(j) ^((c)) has N_(AP) elements representing the probability of seeinga given access point and an additional KN_(AP) elements representing thesignal strength distributions for each access point. (If the accesspoint was not seen from a calibration point x_(j) ^((c)), then itssignal strength distribution is set to all zeros.) Thus the goal is tointerpolate from the calibration pairs (x_(j) ^((c)),d_(j) ^((c))), j=1. . . N_(c) to probabilities for the high-density location nodes (x_(i)^((l)),d_(i) ^((l))), i=1 . . . N_(l).

This interpolation is performed using normalized radial basis functions,which is a common choice for such tasks. The radial basis functionformulation makes a weighted sum of a set of 2-D basis functionscentered on the calibration points to produce the k^(th) component ofthe d vector for the chosen point x: $\begin{matrix}{{d_{k}\left( \underset{\_}{x} \right)} = {\sum\limits_{j = 1}^{N_{c}}\quad\left( \frac{\beta_{jk}{K\left( {{\underset{\_}{x} - {\underset{\_}{x}}_{j}^{(c)}}} \right)}}{\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N_{c}}{K\left( {{\underset{\_}{x} - {\underset{\_}{x}}_{l}^{(c)}}} \right)}} \right)}} & \left. 8 \right)\end{matrix}$

For the kernel function K(r), it is chosen as K(r)=exp(−r²/σ²). Aftersome experimentation, sigma was chosen to be σ=1.0 as a parameter thatproduced good results. The weights β_(jk) were computed with standardleast squares fitting to the calibration points.

Radial basis functions were evaluated at every location node x_(i)^((l)), producing a corresponding vector of probability parameters d_(i)^((l)). The parameters are then extracted to form the access pointprobabilities p(AP_(i)|x_(j) ^((l))) and signal strength probabilitiesp(s_(k)≦s<s_(k+1)|AP_(i),x_(j) ^((l))), thus going from probabilities ata relatively sparse set of calibration points to estimated probabilitiesat the denser set of location nodes. The normalized radial basisfunction is neither guaranteed to produce probabilities in the range[0,1] nor probability distributions that integrate to one. In practiceit came close, however, requiring only slight clamping and normalizingto restore the proper range.

Inferring Location Using HMM

The basic ingredients of an HMM have been summarized as the following:states, initial state probabilities, transition probabilities, andobservation probabilities. The states of the HMM for location are thehigh-density location nodes x_(i) ^((l)), i=1 . . . N_(l) produced withthe drawing program. With no other data about where a device might belocated, the initial state probabilities π_(i), i=1 . . . N_(l) areuniformly distributed over the location nodes, i.e. π_(i)=1/N_(l). Thetransition probabilities are described hereinabove, and are sensitive tothe building's layout, expected pedestrian speeds, and the inference onwhether or not the device is moving. The observation probabilities comefrom the interpolated probabilities, also described hereinabove.

For inferring location at time T the device scans for signal strengthsfrom all access points. The result is an indicator vector I_(T) with oneBoolean element for each of the N_(AP) access points indicating whetheror not the access point was detected. The other result is a vector ofsignal strengths s_(T) that gives the signal strength for each detectedaccess point. Corresponding elements in these two vectors correspond tothe same access point. If the access point was not detected, then thesignal strength value for that access point can be any value, because itis not used. The probability of seeing this scan at location x_(i)^((l)) is $\begin{matrix}{{P\left( {{\underset{\_}{I}}_{T},{{\underset{\_}{s}}_{T}❘{\underset{\_}{x}}_{i}^{(l)}}} \right)} = {\prod\limits_{j = 1}^{N_{AP}}\quad\left\{ \begin{matrix}{{p\left( {{AP}_{j}❘{\underset{\_}{x}}_{i}^{(l)}} \right)}{p\left( {{s_{Tj}❘{AP}_{j}},{\underset{\_}{x}}_{i}^{(l)}} \right)}} & {if} & {I_{Tj} = {true}} \\{1 - {p\left( {{AP}_{j}❘{\underset{\_}{x}}_{i}^{(l)}} \right)}} & {if} & {I_{Tj} = {false}}\end{matrix} \right.}} & (9)\end{matrix}$

Here I_(Tj) means the j^(th) element of I_(T), and s_(Tj) means thej^(th) element of s_(T). Each multiplicand in this product representsone access point, implying that the scan result for each access point isindependent of the other access points. If the j^(th) access point wasseen (I_(Tj)=true), then the multiplicand represents the probability ofseeing this access point at the observed signal strength s_(Tj). If thej^(th) access point was not seen (I_(Tj)=false), then the multiplicandrepresents the probability of not seeing this access point.

These HMM elements are combined with the Viterbi algorithm to produce aset of state probabilities over the high-density location nodes, i.e.,p_(T)(x_(i) ^((l))). For the final location estimate, the expected valueof the location is as follows: $\begin{matrix}{{\underset{\_}{x}}_{T} = \frac{\sum\limits_{i = 1}^{N_{l}}\quad{{p_{T}\left( {\underset{\_}{x}}_{i}^{(l)} \right)}{\underset{\_}{x}}_{i}^{(l)}}}{\sum\limits_{i = 1}^{N_{l}}\quad{p_{T}\left( {\underset{\_}{x}}_{i}^{(l)} \right)}}} & (10)\end{matrix}$

The disclosed architecture when used against the floor plan exampleprovides significant improvements over conventional systems by reducingcalibration effort and while improving accuracy. Because the constraintsand dynamics of location nodes are carefully modeled, high accuracy ismaintained in spite of reduced calibration, compared to conventionalsystems of this type. Application to the example herein showed a medianerror of approximately 1.53 meters without onerous calibration effort.In addition to location, the system also infers whether or not thedevice is moving, which can be an important indicator of the user'scontext.

Computing locations from IEEE 802.11 signal strengths is attractivebecause many office areas spaces are already wired with IEEE 802.11access points, and more and more mobile devices will be equipped withwireless network hardware. While applied herein to IEEE 802.11 signals,the novel architecture may be easily applied to other types of locationsensing, as indicated hereinabove, as well as serving as a platform forsensor fusion.

Referring now to FIG. 10, there is illustrated a block diagram of acomputer operable to execute the disclosed architecture. In order toprovide additional context for various aspects of the present invention,FIG. 10 and the following discussion are intended to provide a brief,general description of a suitable computing environment 1000 in whichthe various aspects of the present invention may be implemented. Whilethe invention has been described above in the general context ofcomputer-executable instructions that may run on one or more computers,those skilled in the art will recognize that the invention also may beimplemented in combination with other program modules and/or as acombination of hardware and software. Generally, program modules includeroutines, programs, components, data structures, etc., that performparticular tasks or implement particular abstract data types. Moreover,those skilled in the art will appreciate that the inventive methods maybe practiced with other computer system configurations, includingsingle-processor or multiprocessor computer systems, minicomputers,mainframe computers, as well as personal computers, hand-held computingdevices, microprocessor-based or programmable consumer electronics, andthe like, each of which may be operatively coupled to one or moreassociated devices. The illustrated aspects of the invention may also bepracticed in distributed computing environments where certain tasks areperformed by remote processing devices that are linked through acommunications network. In a distributed computing environment, programmodules may be located in both local and remote memory storage devices.

With reference again to FIG. 10, there is illustrated an exemplaryenvironment 1000 for implementing various aspects of the inventionincludes a computer 1002, the computer 1002 including a processing unit1004, a system memory 1006 and a system bus 1008. The system bus 1008couples system components including, but not limited to the systemmemory 1006 to the processing unit 1004. The processing unit 1004 may beany of various commercially available processors. Dual microprocessorsand other multi-processor architectures also can be employed as theprocessing unit 1004.

The system bus 1008 can be any of several types of bus structureincluding a memory bus or memory controller, a peripheral bus and alocal bus using any of a variety of commercially available busarchitectures. The system memory 1006 includes read only memory (ROM)1010 and random access memory (RAM) 1012. A basic input/output system(BIOS), containing the basic routines that help to transfer informationbetween elements within the computer 1002, such as during start-up, isstored in the ROM 1010.

The computer 1002 further includes a hard disk drive 1014, a magneticdisk drive 1016, (e.g., to read from or write to a removable disk 1018)and an optical disk drive 1020, (e.g., reading a CD-ROM disk 1022 or toread from or write to other optical media). The hard disk drive 1014,magnetic disk drive 1016 and optical disk drive 1020 can be connected tothe system bus 1008 by a hard disk drive interface 1024, a magnetic diskdrive interface 1026 and an optical drive interface 1028, respectively.The drives and their associated computer-readable media providenonvolatile storage of data, data structures, computer-executableinstructions, and so forth. For the computer 1002, the drives and mediaaccommodate the storage of broadcast programming in a suitable digitalformat. Although the description of computer-readable media above refersto a hard disk, a removable magnetic disk and a CD, it should beappreciated by those skilled in the art that other types of media whichare readable by a computer, such as zip drives, magnetic cassettes,flash memory cards, digital video disks, cartridges, and the like, mayalso be used in the exemplary operating environment, and further thatany such media may contain computer-executable instructions forperforming the methods of the present invention.

A number of program modules can be stored in the drives and RAM 1012,including an operating system 1030, one or more application programs1032, other program modules 1034 and program data 1036. It isappreciated that the present invention can be implemented with variouscommercially available operating systems or combinations of operatingsystems.

A user can enter commands and information into the computer 1002 througha keyboard 1038 and a pointing device, such as a mouse 1040. Other inputdevices (not shown) may include a microphone, an IR remote control, ajoystick, a game pad, a satellite dish, a scanner, or the like. Theseand other input devices are often connected to the processing unit 1004through a serial port interface 1042 that is coupled to the system bus1008, but may be connected by other interfaces, such as a parallel port,a game port, a universal serial bus (“USB”), an IR interface, etc. Amonitor 1044 or other type of display device is also connected to thesystem bus 1008 via an interface, such as a video adapter 1046. Inaddition to the monitor 1044, a computer typically includes otherperipheral output devices (not shown), such as speakers, printers etc.

The computer 1002 may operate in a networked environment using logicalconnections to one or more remote computers, such as a remotecomputer(s) 1048. The remote computer(s) 1048 may be a workstation, aserver computer, a router, a personal computer, portable computer,microprocessor-based entertainment appliance, a peer device or othercommon network node, and typically includes many or all of the elementsdescribed relative to the computer 1002, although, for purposes ofbrevity, only a memory storage device 1050 is illustrated. The logicalconnections depicted include a local area network (LAN) 1052 and a widearea network (WAN) 1054. Such networking environments are commonplace inoffices, enterprise-wide computer networks, intranets and the Internet.

When used in a LAN networking environment, the computer 1002 isconnected to the local network 1052 through a network interface oradapter 1056. The adaptor 1056 may facilitate wired or wirelesscommunication to the LAN 1052, which may also include a wireless accesspoint disposed thereon for communicating with the wireless adaptor 1056.When used in a WAN networking environment, the computer 1002 typicallyincludes a modem 1058, or is connected to a communications server on theLAN, or has other means for establishing communications over the WAN1054, such as the Internet. The modem 1058, which may be internal orexternal, is connected to the system bus 1008 via the serial portinterface 1042. In a networked environment, program modules depictedrelative to the computer 1002, or portions thereof, may be stored in theremote memory storage device 1050. It will be appreciated that thenetwork connections shown are exemplary and other means of establishinga communications link between the computers may be used.

Referring now to FIG. 11, there is illustrated a schematic block diagramof an exemplary computing environment 1100 in accordance with thepresent invention. The system 1100 includes one or more client(s) 1102.The client(s) 1102 can be hardware and/or software (e.g., threads,processes, computing devices). The client(s) 1102 can house cookie(s)and/or associated contextual information by employing the presentinvention, for example. The system 1100 also includes one or moreserver(s) 1104. The server(s) 1104 can also be hardware and/or software(e.g., threads, processes, computing devices). The servers 1104 canhouse threads to perform transformations by employing the presentinvention, for example. One possible communication between a client 1102and a server 1104 may be in the form of a data packet adapted to betransmitted between two or more computer processes. The data packet mayinclude a cookie and/or associated contextual information, for example.The system 1100 includes a communication framework 1106 (e.g., a globalcommunication network such as the Internet) that can be employed tofacilitate communications between the client(s) 1102 and the server(s)1104. Communications may be facilitated via a wired (including opticalfiber) and/or wireless technology. The client(s) 1102 are operablyconnected to one or more client data store(s) 1108 that can be employedto store information local to the client(s) 1102 (e.g., cookie(s) and/orassociated contextual information). Similarly, the server(s) 1104 areoperably connected to one or more server data store(s) 1110 that can beemployed to store information local to the servers 1104.

What has been described above includes examples of the presentinvention. It is, of course, not possible to describe every conceivablecombination of components or methodologies for purposes of describingthe present invention, but one of ordinary skill in the art mayrecognize that many further combinations and permutations of the presentinvention are possible. Accordingly, the present invention is intendedto embrace all such alterations, modifications and variations that fallwithin the spirit and scope of the appended claims. Furthermore, to theextent that the term “includes” is used in either the detaileddescription or the claims, such term is intended to be inclusive in amanner similar to the term “comprising” as “comprising” is interpretedwhen employed as a transitional word in a claim.

1. A location system that facilitates locating a wireless device,comprising: a computer-based mapping component that maps identifiedlocations to location nodes; a measuring component that measures signalstrength data related to the location nodes; and a probabilityprocessing component that determines at least one of motion and thelocation of the wireless device using a regression function that isbased at least in part upon the signal strength data, the regressionfunction estimating new locations based upon the signal strength data.2. The system of claim 1, the mapping component provides arepresentation of possible paths that the wireless device may traverseto the identified locations.
 3. The system of claim 1, the mappingcomponent provides a graphical representation of all of the identifiedlocations to which the wireless device may travel, and possible pathsthat the wireless device may traverse to the identified locations. 4.The system of claim 1 the mapping component provides the capability ofassigning edge weights to adjacent and non-adjacent location nodes. 5.The system of claim 1, the mapping component represents pathways to theidentified locations and automatically converts the endpoint of eachpathway to an end node, which is one type of location node.
 6. Thesystem of claim 5, the mapping component automatically distributesintermediate nodes among the location nodes according to predeterminedspatial criteria.
 7. The system of claim 1, the velocity of the wirelessdevice is computed from at least one of an expected velocity based uponconsideration of a probability distribution of human pedestrian speedsand on an inference of whether or not the wireless device is moving. 8.The system of claim 1, the mapping component derives a shortest pathbetween two of the location nodes based upon a constraint-sensitivepath-planning algorithm that considers physical barriers between the twocorresponding identified locations.
 9. The system of claim 1, themeasuring component measures the signal strengths of networkedtransmitting devices displaced throughout an area that includes theidentified locations.
 10. The system of claim 1, the probabilityprocessing component generating an observation probability for each ofthe location nodes based on signal strengths received at that respectivelocation node.
 11. The system of claim 1, the probability processingcomponent automatically generates and associates transition probabilitydata with the location nodes using path constraints, moving probabilitydata, and speed distribution data.
 12. The system of claim 1, theprobability processing component using a Viterbi algorithm to generate aprobability distribution over all location nodes for every set ofobserved signal strengths.
 13. The system of claim 1, the regressionfunction is an interpolation function that extends probabilitydistributions of the location nodes to the new locations.
 14. The systemof claim 1, the probability processing component using amaximum-likelihood decoding algorithm to optimize over all possiblepaths between the identified locations with respect to a history of themeasured signal properties.
 15. The system of claim 1, the probabilityprocessing component capturing quantitatively a variation in signalstrength of a wireless transmitter by sensing the wireless transmitterwith the strongest signal, and calculating a variance of that strongestsignal over time.
 16. A wireless device location system, comprising:means for measuring signal properties related to identified locations;means for determining an inference of motion of the mobile device; andmeans for approximating a location of the mobile device based at leastin part on the inference of motion.
 17. A method of determining thelocation dynamics of a mobile device, comprising: measuring signalproperties related to identified locations; calculating with probabilitydata an inference of motion of the mobile device; and approximating alocation of the mobile device based at least in part on the inference ofmotion.